Case law

Freeman v. County School Board

82 F. Supp. 167 · District Court, E.D. Virginia · Jul 29, 1948

Gaines v. Canada, supra; Sipuel v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma, supra. … Mills v. Board of Education of Anne Arundel County, supra, and Reynolds v. Board of Public Instruction for Dade County, supra.

Brown v. Gaston County Dyeing Machine Co.

325 F. Supp. 541 · District Court, W.D. North Carolina · Dec 31, 1970

) shown for the differences; and there were other white welders who made less progress than Brown. … Brown’s progress in fact was at least as good as average among the welders in the plant.

Brown v. Upper Marlboro Town Police

District Court, District of Columbia · Aug 28, 2009

District and JEROME JULIUS BROWN, SR, Bankruptcy Courts Plaintiff, v. … Brown v. Califano, 75 F.RD. 497, 498 (D.D.C. 1977). Plaintiff's complaint fails to accomplish the basic purpose of Rule 8(a).

Breuder v. Board of Trustees

238 F. Supp. 3d 1054 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Mar 3, 2017

v. … Breuder cites Valentino v.

Brown v. Philadelphia Housing Authority

237 F. Supp. 2d 567 · District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · Dec 13, 2002

The absence of a HUD determination as to Municipal Court procedures distinguishes Brown from Gilmore v. … The specific grievance procedures which PHA must follow are set forth in the consent decree in Brown v. Philadelphia Housing Authority .... ”); Rivera v. Philadelphia Hous. Auth., Civ. A.

Brown v. Nationscredit Financial Services Corp.

349 F. Supp. 2d 1134 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Jan 4, 2005

April 28, 2003); Jenkins v. Mercantile Mortgage Co., 231 F.Supp.2d 737, 745 (N.D.Ill.2002); Dowdy v. First Metro. Mortgage Co., No. 01 C 7211, 2002 WL 745851 , at *1-2 (N.D.Ill.2002); Elliott v. … But see McIntosh v. Irwin Union Bank & Trust Co., 215 F.R.D. 26, 30 (D.Mass.2003); Reynolds v.

Brown v. FL Roberts & Co., Inc.

419 F. Supp. 2d 7 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 3, 2006

Co. v. … In EEOC v.

Brown v. City of Galveston, Tex.

870 F. Supp. 155 · District Court, S.D. Texas · Nov 30, 1994

See Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill, 470 U.S. 532, 538 , 105 S.Ct. 1487, 1491 , 84 L.Ed.2d 494 (1985); Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 569 , 92 S.Ct. 2701, 2705 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972). … Glagola v.

Hopkins v. Board of Education

73 F. Supp. 3d 974 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Nov 14, 2014

Hopkins has not shown that the Board, or' Berman, failed to take reasonable steps to stop any parent harassment. See Knox v. … Hill v. Tangherlini, 724 F.3d 965, 968 (7th Cir.2013). Because Hopkins is unable to show that the Board’s stated reasons are pretextual, summary judgment in the Board’s favor is warranted.

Brown v. Neely Truck Line, Inc.

884 F. Supp. 1534 · District Court, M.D. Alabama · Apr 17, 1995

In Mlsna v. … See Gaskell v.

Carlisle v. Lopresti

47 F. Supp. 2d 973 · District Court, N.D. Illinois · Apr 30, 1999

See Hartman v. Board of Trustees of Community College Dist. No. 508, 4 F.3d 465, 471 (7th Cir.1993) (citing Colburn v. Trustees of Ind. Univ., 973 F.2d 581, 586 (7th Cir.1992)). … Roberts v. Broski, 979 F.Supp. 746, 752 (N.D.Ill.1997) (citing Mt. Healthy, 429 U.S. at 287 , 97 S.Ct. 568 ; Cromley v. Board of Educ. of Lockport *982 High Sch. Dist., 17 F.3d 1059, 1068 (7th Cir.1994)).

Brown v. Sterling Aluminum Products Corp.

246 F. Supp. 279 · District Court, E.D. Missouri · Aug 18, 1965

And Republic Steel Corp. v. … Construing a similar clause, Oddie v.

Nesom v. Brown & Root USA, Inc.

790 F. Supp. 123 · District Court, M.D. Louisiana · Apr 14, 1992

UNUM also relies on McBarron v. … Hansen v. Continental Ins. Co., 940 F.2d 971 (5th Cir.1991); Ramirez v.

Brown v. Washington/Baltimore Cellular, Inc.

109 F. Supp. 2d 421 · District Court, D. Maryland · Jul 20, 2000

Plaintiffs originally filed these suits in Circuit Court for Charles County (Brown) and Circuit Court for Montgomery County (Matinrazm). … Co. v.

Brown v. Louisville and Nashville Railroad Company

135 F. Supp. 28 · District Court, E.D. Louisiana · Oct 13, 1955

Brown, who was killed. … See Bergeron v. Department of Highways, supra. Judgment for defendant. 1 . See Bergeron v. Department of Highways, 221 La. 595 , 60 So.2d 4 ; Jackson v. Cook, 189 La. 860 , 181 So. 195 ; Bottman v.

Brown v. Commissioner of Social Security

430 F. Supp. 2d 102 · District Court, W.D. New York · May 15, 2005

INTRODUCTION This is an action brought by plaintiff Katrina Brown, pro se, on behalf of her minor son, Kirk D. … The Commissioner employs a three-step sequential analysis to determine whether a child is disabled within the meaning of the Act. 20 C.F.R. § 416.924 (a); see also Pollard v.

Northwest Environmental Defense Center v. Brown

476 F. Supp. 2d 1188 · District Court, D. Oregon · Mar 1, 2007

Before the court are State Defendants’ (Marvin Brown, Oregon State Forester, and members of the Oregon Board of Forestry, Stephen Hobbs, Barbara Craig, Diane Snyder, Larry Giustina, Chris Heffernan, William Hutchison, and … See Newton County Wildlife Ass’n v. Rogers, 141 F.3d 803, 810 (8th Cir.1998); O'Aha ‘Ino v. Galiher, 28 F.Supp.2d 1258, 1261 (D.Hawai'i 1998). Another case, North Carolina Shellfish Growers Ass’n v.

United States v. Brown

31 F.2d 307 · District Court, S.D. Florida · Mar 13, 1929

The testimony has been taken, and this case was heard on final hearing at the same time as the ease of United States v. … Denapolis v. United States, 3 F.(2d) 722 (5th C. C. A.); United States v. Ward (C. C. A.) 6 F.(2d) 182 ; Lewinsohn v. United States (C. C. A.) 278 F. 421 .

Brown v. MISSOURI BD. OF PROBATION AND PAROLE

727 F. Supp. 524 · District Court, W.D. Missouri · Dec 8, 1989

Petitioner’s first Section 2254 petition, filed as Brown v. … John William Brown v. Missouri Board of Probation and Parole, et al, No. 68,353, Sept. 16, 1986. See, Petitioner’s Motion Exhibit B.” 5 Petition at 6(a).

Brown v. Wheat First Securities, Inc.

101 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, District of Columbia · Jun 13, 2000

Brown, a former employee of defendant Wheat First Securities, Inc., is suing Wheat First, First Union Corp., and several individuals employed by Wheat First for conspiracy in violation of Section 2 of the Civil Rights Act … The Act establishes “a federal policy favoring arbitration,” Shearson/American Express v. McMahon, 482 U.S. 220, 226 , 107 S.Ct. 2332 , 96 L.Ed.2d 185 (1987) (citing Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital v.